Community-Based Livestock Improvement and Conservation:
Experiences from Open-Nucleus Breeding Programmes in West Africa

New priorities in livestock development were set
following the 1972-1973 drought in the Sahel. These new priorities included a
community-based national sheep improvement programme emphasizing smallholders.
The primary goal was the improvement of the performance of the breed.
Nevertheless, the focus of all activities was directed at the utilization and
conservation of the local Djallonké sheep breed. The breeding strategy
follows that of an open-nucleus breeding scheme with selection based on
individual performance of the local breed, Djallonké. The selection
scheme included three phases: an on-farm preselection phase, an on-station first
selection phase and an on-station final selection phase followed by the
distribution of selected rams to farmers for mating. The selection yielded two
categories of rams: the first-category rams, used in base flock mating and, the
second-category rams sold to other farmers. All the farms involved throughout
the country were instructed to breed only the local breed of Djallonké
sheep. About 14 000 Djallonké breeding ewes, raised on 170 smallholder
farms, were involved in the selection programme of the local Djallonké.
The breed is highly appreciated because of its ability to tolerate
trypanosomiasis. The Djallonké sheep live and reproduce in the
tsetse-infested zones of the tropical humid and subhumid ecological
environments. Despite some difficulties, farmers are in the process of
organizing sheep-breeders associations to continue the breeding and conservation
of the local Djallonké sheep initiated by the Government of Côte
dIvoire.

Introduction

The history of livestock development in Côte
dIvoire began very recently. It started with the drought of 1972-1973 in
the Sahel. Because the future of the countrys livestock supplies were at
risk during that period, a very high priority was set on livestock development,
particularly on short- or medium-reproductive-cycle species (MPA, 1976). A
campaign to promote livestock production throughout the country was launched. An
extension agency, Société pour le Développement de la
Production Animale (SODEPRA), was created and located in five regional offices
(Centre, Nord, Ouest, Sud-Ouest, Sud-Est). In 1977, SODEPRAs central
regional office initiated the national sheep programme, Programme National Ovin
(PNO). Three major activities were assigned to the PNO. These activities
were:

The
creation of the national sheep centre, Centre National Ovin (CNO): The CNO had
the objectives of selecting farmers and providing them with improved breeding
stocks of Djallonké sheep, testing out new sheep production techniques
and training sheep farmers and extension workers. A special programme was later
initiated to establish, after the training, a new generation of young sheep
farmers - the Programme dAppui à lElevage Ovin
(PAEO).

The creation of a
state farm for commercial sheep production: The commercial production unit had a
mandate for large-scale sheep production through the utilization of the
Stylosanthes hamata cover crop in the cassava cropping system.

The provision of
technical assistance to sheep producers: The tasks to be carried out were
organizing sheep producers in rural areas, promoting and rationalizing private
or communal sheep enterprises, encouraging villagers to establish new flocks
using modern techniques and organizing the production and marketing of slaughter
animals. In addition, the technical assistance service collaborated with the
veterinary health service in vaccinating farmers flocks against major
diseases (Peste des Petits Ruminants [PPR] and Pasteurellosis) once a year and
oversaw the prophylactic programme.

After several years of extension work through the activities
of the PNO, a selection programme on pure-breed Djallonké sheep was
initiated in 1983 in the central and northeast regions of Côte d'Ivoire.
It was later extended to other regions of the country. The primary objectives of
the selection programme were to improve growth and live weight of pure-breed
Djallonké sheep and provide smallholder sheep farmers with improved
breeding animals. Although the primary goal was the improvement of performance,
the focus of all activities was directed at the utilization and conservation of
the local Djallonké breed of sheep.

Role of communities in conserving animal genetic
resources

The selection programme (Programme National de
Sélection Ovine [PNSO]) was designed as a development project with
smallholder farmers being the primary target. One of the major requirements was
farmers who breed only local Djallonké sheep. All the farms involved were
instructed to breed only Djallonké sheep and eliminate animals showing
another sheep type phenotype from their flocks. The programme was designed to
include the maximum number of Djallonké sheep raised in the country.
However, not all farms were included in the programme. The PAEO contributed
significantly to the PNSO. A total of 209 Djallonké farms were
established. Each farm received at least 150 breeding Djallonké ewes,
which were automatically included in the selection programme.

The major reason for promoting the local Djallonké
breed was its adaptation to the physical environment of Côte
dIvoire. The climate of the region is of the sudano-guinean type. Annual
rainfall during the study period was 1 112 mm, with the lowest monthly rainfall
in December (7 mm) and the highest in August (201 mm). The average temperature
was 26 °C and ranged from 19 to 35 °C. The vegetation consists of
arboreal savannah. The breed is known in tropical humid and subhumid
environments for its adaptation. It is widely believed to be trypanotolerant,
mainly because of its ability to live and produce in the tsetse-infested zones.
Sheep coming from neighbouring countries find it difficult to survive in the
Djallonké environment. In addition, it is widely believed that the
Djallonké has better taste and better carcass characteristics.

Community mobilization

The PNSO activities started in 1983 with farmers involved in
the extension service of the PNO. Based on their experiences and skills in
modern sheep production techniques, some farmers were chosen to participate in
the programme. These farmers were recognized to be capable of keeping records of
their flocks, correctly identifying their animals, following the prophylactic
programme and giving their animals supplements during critical periods. The
enrolled farms comprised smallholder flocks and the two state farms. The
smallholder flocks were those of the traditional sheep farmers and those
established through the PAEO programme. Further requirements for the farmers to
be registered with the extension service included the holding of property rights
to the land where their farm was located, easy access to a water source (river
or agropastoral dam) and easy access to the farm by car. The principal objective
was to help farmers, most of whom are smallholders, to move from traditional
husbandry practices to new, improved management techniques.

Farmers were taught how to build night enclosures, shelters,
collecting yards, sorting pens (with traditional local material) and footbaths.
They also learned how to castrate unwanted rams, to identify lambs at birth and
to keep records. Lambing events to be recorded included the identification of
lambs at birth, the recording of dates of birth, sex of lamb, birth type, birth
weights and 80-day weight. Lamb identification numbers were given as series of
consecutive numbers based on the mating period and the number of ewes mated in
each flock.

Lambs were born on the participating farms. Participating
farmers used low- to medium-input production systems. Flock management varied
from exclusive utilization of natural savannah pasture with few supplements on
smallholders farms to the use of natural and cultivated pasture with a
high level of supplements on state farms. Supplements were provided to nursing
ewes and during the dry season. Supplements were combinations of various
agricultural and agro-industrial by-products. Cereal by-products were often
used. Salt lick and water were provided ad lib.

Vaccination against major diseases (PPR and Pasteurellosis)
was provided free of charge through the veterinary health service. Endoparasite
and ectoparasite controls were performed once or twice a month depending on the
season. It was the responsibility of the farmers to carry out those treatments.
Until 1998, veterinary products and fencing material were available at
subsidized prices.

Farmers contributed to the programme by selling their selected
ram lambs to be monitored until thefinal selection process. They offered
their farms as field training laboratories for future candidates in the process
of establishing their sheep farms. The number of farms and breeding ewes
increased in all the regions (Tables 1a & 1b). In March 1999, 143 farms were
involved in the programme, which represents 17 000 breeding Djallonké
ewes (88 percent from smallholder farms and 12 percent from one state
farm).

The governments of Côte dIvoire and France and the
European Community, through the European Development Fund, provided funding for
the selection programme. Since 1999, the Côte dIvoire Government has
funded the programme on its own. In the long run, farmers will take over the
management of the programme and will be responsible for organizing funding
through their farmers organization, lAssociation pour la Promotion
du Djallonké de Côte dIvoire (APRODJALCI).

Organization and coordination of the
programme

The breeding strategy follows that of an open-nucleus breeding
scheme with selection based on individual performance of the rams. The structure
of the PNSO is composed of one central performance evaluation station for rams
(the nucleus) and farmers flocks of only breeding ewes (the base
population). The flock of selected rams maintained at the PNSO
performance-testing station is considered to be the nucleus. The station holds
only selected rams. There is no ewe in the nucleus flock on station. The ewe
flocks are those of the farmers.

Table 1a. Evolution of number of flocks and breeding ewes
in the PNSO from 1984 to 1994 under the SODEPRA extension service

Year

SODEPRA Regions

Total

Centre

Nord

Sud-Est

Ouest & Sud-Ouest

1984

Flocks

35

-

-

-

35

Ewes

2 987

-

-

-

2 987

1985

Flocks

32

-

-

-

32

Ewes

3 488

-

-

-

3 488

1986

Flocks

36

13

3

1

53

Ewes

3 977

1 370

450

300

6 097

1987

Flocks

40

13

3

14

70

Ewes

5 909

1 305

407

1 090

8 711

1988

Flocks

43

14

8

11

76

Ewes

5 956

1 961

566

676

9 159

1989

Flocks

62

16

10

12

100

Ewes

7 727

1 500

621

730

10 578

1990

Flocks

60

10

8

8

86

Ewes

7 548

1 430

449

589

10 016

1991

Flocks

51

9

7

10

77

Ewes

8 406

1 606

359

823

11 194

1992

Flocks

60

0

7

4

71

Ewes

9 268

0

411

460

10 139

1993

Flocks

73

0

5

4

82

Ewes

9 871

0

301

494

10 666

1994

Flocks

89

0

3

92

Ewes

12 453

0

196

12 649

Table 1b. Evolution of number of flocks and breeding ewes
in the PNSO from 1995 to 2000 under the Agence Nationale pour le
Développement Rural (ANADER) extension service

Year

ANADER Regions

Total

Centre

Centre- Nord

Centre-Ouest

Nord

Ouest

Est

Sud

Sud-Ouest

1995

Flocks

25

51

07

0

0

9

2

0

94

Ewes

3 040

7 784

1 265

0

0

735

185

0

13 009

1996

Flocks

32

57

7

0

0

13

2

0

111

Ewes

3 910

9 267

1 322

0

0

1 362

145

0

16 006

1997

Flocks

31

60

7

0

0

22

3

0

123

Ewes

3 450

10 147

1 280

0

0

1 799

205

0

16 881

1998

Flocks

29

59

12

12

5

22

4

0

143

Ewes

3 834

8 254

1 416

923

237

1 894

310

0

16 868

1999

Flocks

24

52

14

4

5

17

2

0

118

Ewes

3 225

7 619

1 181

190

202

1 633

171

0

14 221

2000

Flocks

24

55

11

6

5

20

2

0

123

Ewes

3 225

7 631

971

283

202

1 838

171

0

14 321

The selection scheme included three phases: an on-farm
preselection phase, an on-station first selection phase and an on-station final
selection phase followed by the distribution of selected rams to farmers for
mating. Mating was scheduled from the programme headquarters. Selected breeding
rams were brought to the farms for a mating period of about 45 days. Ewes were
mated every eight months to a group of sires in a ratio of 1 to 30 with the
number of sires in a group varying from 1 to 13. Replacement females were
produced within the flocks. However, farmers were allowed to purchase ewe lambs
from other participating farmers.

When the first-born lamb reached about 80 days of age,
individual lamb weights were recorded. Subsequent weights were taken at about
23-day intervals. Two or three weights of each lamb born on a farm were recorded
and used to estimate 80-day weight. Male lambs were selected based on 80-day
weights, linearly extrapolated using recorded weights. Lambs having a weight
equal to flock average plus one standard deviation were selected. In practice
lambs having a weight greater or equal to 13 kg were selected and were bought
from the farmers based on their live weights. Non-selected ram lambs were
castrated. More and more farmers preferred not to castrate their non-selected
lambs and to raise them in a separate flock away from the ewe flocks.

Animals, selected from various farms, were transferred to and
maintained at the central performance testing station managed at the programme
headquarters. The rams were selected based on their weights at 180 and 365 days
of age on-station. Animals were weighed three or four times over a period of 10
to 12 weeks and their 180-day weights linearly extrapolated. Those with 180-day
weights less than 20 kg were culled. From 1987, rams with weights greater or
equal to 23 kg were classified as first-category rams; those with weights
between 20 and 23 kg were classified as second-category rams. Selected rams
continued to be monitored with a second series of three or four weighings until
they reached 12 to 14 months of age. The final selection was made based on their
365-day weights. The selection yielded two categories of ram: first-category
rams were used in base flocks' mating and second-category rams were sold to
non-PNSO farmers (Table 2). The required weight at 365 days of age to qualify as
a first-category ram was 35 kg. Rams weighing between 30 and 35 kg were
classified as second-category rams.

On-station animals were maintained on pasture (savannah and
cultivated pastures of Panicum, Centrosema and Stylosanthes
spp.). Ram lambs were raised on savannah pasture in order to allow them to
get used to grazing on natural pasture, the most common management practice in
smallholder flocks where they would later be used. In addition to pasture, ram
lambs received 500-700 g/head of concentrate of cottonseed cake, wheat bran and
molasses per day. In the dry season, rams received mixed
Panicum-Centrosema hay and rice straw. They were treated for external and
internal parasites, vaccinated against PPR and ovine brucellosis. A checkup for
ovine brucellosis was also performed.

Benefit distribution

Farmers in the base population use the selected rams from the
nucleus for mating. In return, ram lambs born on those farms are bought and
brought to the nucleus for evaluation and eventually selected (or not) to be
sires. The price offered for the ram lambs constitutes substantial revenue for
the farmers.

The number of selected breeding sires in the nucleus available
for mating fluctuates between 180 and 200 animals annually. Furthermore, 100 to
120 second-category rams are sold every year to farms not in the selection
programme. Over the past 15 years, the programme has produced more than 1 000
first-category selected breeding sires for the base population and about 2 000
second-category rams sold to non-base population flocks (Table 2). The
dissemination of the selected rams is so effective that the number of
second-category rams produced every year is not enough to satisfy
demand.

As far as we know, the PNSO programme is a unique selection
programme applied to the local Djallonké breed in West Africa. Over the
years, various West African countries (Burkina Faso, Ghana, Togo, Sao Tome and
Principe) have imported Djallonké sheep from Côte dIvoire
either as live animals (rams and ewes) or semen.

Table 2. Number of ram lambs selected on-farm and selected
breeding sires in the PNSO from 1984 to 2000

Year

On-farm selected ram lambs

2nd category rams

1st category rams

1984

206

0

51

1985

230

0

63

1986

305

65

64

1987

497

87

79

1988

512

118

128

1989

469

124

141

1990

0

133

10

1991

406

304

44

1992

371

96

34

1993

599

128

21

1994

858

134

34

1995

526

131

41

1996

443

195

103

1997

337

90

36

1998

313

157

95

1999

361

76

46

2000

212

65

136

Total

6 645

1 905

1 127

Local concepts of breeds

Farmers use various phenotypic characteristics to recognize
the breed. These characteristics include the length of the tail and the ears,
the shape of the horns, the form of the face, the shape of the scrotum, the
presence of mane or neck ruff on the males and the height of the animals.
Djallonké is the name used for the breed. It is the small,
horizontal-eared and thin-tail-hair breed of sheep widely distributed throughout
the humid and savannah zones of West and Central Africa. It is classified among
the thin-tailed-hair sheep, within the subgroup of tropical dwarf sheep, based
on fleece and tail types (Epstein, 1971). It is a compact breed with a small
mature height and size (Rombaut and Van Vlaenderen, 1976). Rams are horned but
females are usually polled. The presence of mane or neck ruff on the males is a
typical characteristic of the breed. Coat colour varies from spotted black and
white to solid black or white. Any sheep showing different characteristics is
not considered a Djallonké sheep. The importance of the Djallonké
sheep for the farmers lies in its trypanotolerance.

Critical lessons learned from implementing the
programme

Farmers are motivated as long as funds are available and
inputs are available at subsidized prices. The decline in number of farms and
breeding ewes occurred with the change that took place in the organization and
coordination of the programme. In 1990, the number of farms was 86 compared with
100 in the previous year, as a result of the government withdrawing subsidies on
veterinary products and fencing material. Since 1998, flock sizes and numbers
have been declining because farmers are required to deposit their recording
sheet with the nearest extension office and pay for the use of rams for mating.
The number of flocks (breeding ewes) fluctuates from year to year, as new flocks
enter the base and some leave, because of the openness of the programme. Out of
the 209 farms that were established through the PAEO programme, only 175 are
still operating. Some are in the process of closing down although they have
loans to pay off.

The farmers are not all equally motivated. Although all flocks
were supervised by the same service, uptake of the extension package differed
from one flock to another. Farmers did not all have the same purchasing power,
the same educational background and family situation. About 50 farms closed for
various reasons. The deep financial involvement of the government at the
beginning of the programme has led to a belief among the farmers that they
should always be assisted. Any change that requires their financial involvement
is seen as a reason to withdraw.

The desire of the farmers, most of whom are smallholders, to
move from traditional husbandry practices to new, improved management techniques
has been the major factor that has kept the programme going. Extension officers
have to be very closely involved in all aspects of the programme from the
beginning and financial support should be available and non-interrupted. A
veterinary health service should be available. Agro-industrial production plants
are essential. They should be able to provide the by-products needed for feed
and be in the proximity of most farms.

Genetic analyses of the programme indicated that genetic
values of the animals have been maintained or slightly increased during the
period of selection. The poor nutritional conditions of most smallholder farms
and the fluctuating economic and social conditions of the farmers interfered
with the ability of the Djallonké sheep to express their genetic
potential.

Despite these impediments, raising Djallonké sheep as a
modern and profitable enterprise has become a cultural habit in Côte
dIvoire as indicated by the number of farms and farmers associations
established throughout the country. They include the following: Association des
Producteurs dOvins et Caprins du Sud (APROCASUD), Association
Professionnelle des Eleveurs Mountonniers du Centre (APEMCE) and Groupement des
Eleveurs Professionnels de Petits Ruminants de Boundiali (GEPPRB). Nevertheless,
communication among members of the interest groups is considered a very
important issue because some of the members feel left out if they are not
informed about various events. Furthermore, for the activity to be viable, it
should be an integral part of the whole farming system; the only activity of
many of those who gave up being part of the programme was raising
sheep.